New Jerseyans Reject Near Record Number of Local School Budgets

New Jersey residents defeated more than one out of three local
school budgets this month, a development that education groups say
could force long-overdue action on tax reform.

In elections held across the state April 6, voters rejected proposed
budgets in 210 of 553 school districts. All of the budgets called for
higher property taxes.

State education officials said it was the worst approval rate since
1975, when 58 percent of all local spending plans were rejected.

The elections that year took place amid legislative wrangling over
tax reform that was being forced by a state supreme court ruling that
declared New Jersey's school-finance system unconstitutional. After
prolonged debate and a court-ordered shutdown of schools statewide,
law4makers in 1976 approved the current tax and school-aid systems.

Meanwhile, a legal challenge to the existing aid system reached a
key stage last week, as the state board of education voted to uphold
Commissioner of Education Saul A. Cooperman's rejection of an
administrative-law judge's finding that state courts would probably
vote to strike down the system.

The board's action marked the final step in administrative
proceedings in the case, Abbott v. Burke. Lawyers for the 20 students
named as plaintiffs in the suit must file their appeal of the board's
ruling with the appellate division of the state superior court this
week.

Vote of No Confidence

New Jersey education groups said the rejection of local school
budgets this month reflected voter displeasure with the state's
unwillingness to fully fund the state-aid formula, which in turn has
forced districts to raise their property taxes to the point where they
are among the highest in the nation.

"Without full state funding, school boards have to go back to local
taxpayers for more funds--and that means property-tax increases,"
Dennis Giordano, president of the New Jersey Education Association,
said last week.

"Many citizens are taking out their frustrations by voting against
badly needed education dollars in the school-budget elections," he
added, "partly because property taxes are highest where people are
least able to pay them."

According to Joe Flannery, a spokesman for the New Jersey School
Boards Association, the rejection of the districts' budgets may be "the
straw that breaks the camel's back on the tax-reform issue."

Due to an unanticipated revenue shortfall, Gov. Thomas H. Kean has
proposed a budget for the upcoming fiscal year that would provide
districts with $234.5 million less than the $3.8 billion they are
entitled to under the state-aid formula.

This month, representatives of the state's major education groups
held a rally in Trenton to support a Senate-passed bill that would add
$98 million to the Governor's budget request. The bill's sponsors said
the extra funds would be raised through new taxes on liquor sales and
plastic bottles, and savings that would result from a state takeover of
local courts and welfare programs.

'Only Game in Town'

Although the proposal would fall about $140 million short of the
full-funding level, educators think it may be "the only game in town,"
Mr. Flannery said.

Assembly Speaker Chuck Hardwick, however, has blocked the bill in
the legislature's lower chamber. He has expressed support for a measure
passed by the Assembly in February that would fully fund the state-aid
formula. That bill is opposed by Mr. Kean, who has pointed out that it
does not specify how the additional revenues will be raised.

School administrators in districts whose budgets were rejected by
voters must submit new spending plans to their local boards by April
28.

If the boards determine that the plans would fail to meet the state
constitutional mandate for a "thorough and efficient" education, they
can appeal to Mr. Cooperman, who is empowered to order local tax
increases.

Thirty-two districts filed such appeals with the education
commissioner last year, according to a spokesman for the education
department's office of financial management services.

Vol. 08, Issue 30

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.